Even when they've moved away from such a culture into other countries they maintain the same servile attitude and cover themselves up and take all the sh.t their male relatives/spouses dish up and refuse to obtain help from the government to break the vicious circle.

Oh, and they force their daughters to take it too. They're like crabs pulling each other down instead of helping each other.

It's the same in each religion,
Christianity went trough the same thing, you can't blame woman then too for what has happened to them, can you?

The only reason why western civilisation is beyond this is because we don't believe anymore or we believe, but not in what other humans (priests etc.)say is right but what we feel is right, because we became more sceptical and because we don't live in the middle ages anymore...

Most islamic people still live in their middle ages, so It's not the fault of those women that they are treated like crap...
The ones that move away with their family to western civilisation, keep hanging on to their values and beliefs, because they truely believe that what they believe is right...
If you would move to an Islamic country, you would still hang on to your western believes also because you believe they're right...

There are islamic people in our western countries that evoluated beyond that, but it is sad to see it is a minority, but not impossible

(just making sure you get that, and that i'm not defending what is happening there, i just get where they come from, not saying they're right..)

Just don't blame the woman, they play a part in it too, but they aren't really in the right place to make a change about their lifes, at least not without getting killed, decaputated, and so on, like the movie showed...

~Just Imagine~ said:
>It's the same in each religion,
>Christianity went trough the same thing, you can't blame woman then too for what has happened to them, can you?

How can you say it's the same in each religion? Christianity never said anything about women having to live in cloth prisons or having their genitals mutilated.

Also, the atrocities on the record of christianity belong to an era of 200 years ago. I'd say that's a pretty hefty time frame to catch up.

>Most islamic people still live in their middle ages, so It's not the fault of those women that they are treated like crap...

In a way it is, in a way it isn't. Sometimes people don't want to be helped.

>The ones that move away with their family to western civilisation, keep hanging on to their values and beliefs, because they truely believe that what they believe is right...

I'd rather have tax money go to return tickets than to welfare payments for those people.

>If you would move to an Islamic country, you would still hang on to your western believes also because you believe they're right...

I'd like to see how that'd work out.

You travel a lot, you know how flemish people in general at least are when they go on a holiday/move abroad.

You learn the language and customs of the area you are visting. You don't go running through mosques in your hiking boots and in saudi arabia for example women who work for international companies there keep their non-customary (for that area) activities to the compounds instead of forcing it down people's throats over there. Probably because they'd get arrested over it as well.

When chinese people or indian people move here they pick up the language and fit in, how come it's always islamic people causing the trouble and not asians?

>There are islamic people in our western countries that evoluated beyond that, but it is sad to see it is a minority, but not impossible

True, but even then it seems they still feel more turkish than belgian for example, for which I refer you to a recent interview in Humo with "flemish" politicians Selahattin Koçak, Rachida Lamrabet and Karim Hassoun.

Christophe said:
>How can you say it's the same in each religion? Christianity never said anything about women having to live in cloth prisons or having their genitals mutilated.

It is the same.
As far as I heard (I haven't read it myself) the koran doesn't mention it either, just like the bible didn't mention it...
but it happenened none the less, and religion is used as an excuse for violence

All the islam or chistianity ever was or is is a big fat excuse to make war, to be evil, to be cruel, to gain power, etc.
Nothing more, nothing less

Religion will never ever atain to something,
Humans biggest flaw is their absurd need to believe that there is some weird spirit watching over us, seriously, thats fucked up...

>
>Also, the atrocities on the record of christianity belong to an era of 200 years ago. I'd say that's a pretty hefty time frame to catch up.

No, you can't assume that every country evolves at the same speed, they are now where christianity was 200 years ago and more, they are in their middle ages, and I believe that they where called the dark ages for a reason... They won't catch up on us, not by us forcing them, they have to get trough it themselfes, they have to won't to change the things for the better, forcing it upon them will not ever make a difference, it will only reinforce their believe in their values, which is honestly the last thing we really want!
It's gonna take time, unfortunatly

>I'd rather have tax money go to return tickets than to welfare payments for those people.

I agree, adapt, or get back, but if you do adapt (learn the languages, respect our values, ...) then you have every right to be treaten equally
And I don't mean they have to give up their core believes, just respect ours... And not force theirs upon us

>When chinese people or indian people move here they pick up the language and fit in, how come it's always islamic people causing the trouble and not asians?

Because their believes don't mingle so well with ours i guess, Plus there are more islamic people overhere then other like asians as you mention, i think thats why they believe they have the right too hang on and not adapt, although they don't have that right

I also believe something has to happenen, but I do not believe the answer is as simple as sent them all back and let them fight it out themselves...

~Just Imagine~ said:
>Christophe said:
>>How can you say it's the same in each religion? Christianity never said anything about women having to live in cloth prisons or having their genitals mutilated.
>
>It is the same.

Actually it isn't. The bible does not promote war and it does not urge to conquer and impose biblical law on conquered slave territories. The koran does.

>All the islam or chistianity ever was or is is a big fat excuse to make war, to be evil, to be cruel, to gain power, etc.
>Nothing more, nothing less

If you're referring to the crusades, those were defensive wars.

>Humans biggest flaw is their absurd need to believe that there is some weird spirit watching over us, seriously, thats fucked up...

True

>No, you can't assume that every country evolves at the same speed, they are now where christianity was 200 years ago and more, they are in their middle ages, and I believe that they where called the dark ages for a reason...

They're called the dark ages because there is so little written record of that era that it is "dark" compared to others.

I don't assume that every country evolves at the same speed, that's pretty clear if you look at the world.

>They won't catch up on us, not by us forcing them, they have to get trough it themselfes, they have to won't to change the things for the better, forcing it upon them will not ever make a difference, it will only reinforce their believe in their values, which is honestly the last thing we really want!
>It's gonna take time, unfortunatly

So we should just sit by while they move here and try and institute sharia law because we can't force them into accepting our rules of the game here?

>I also believe something has to happenen, but I do not believe the answer is as simple as sent them all back and let them fight it out themselves...

Well, I think it is, and I have good reason to see it that way.

I'm not talking about "shipping them back", that's unfair to those people who do make good use of the chances they're given here and who're at the receiving end of the stick all too often already.

But I do call for immigration stops aside from needed categories of workers and temporary political refugees.

In an ideal world I'd be fine with the whole "no borders" concept, the reality of it is that when you give somebody a finger they'll want your arm and if you don't give it you're a racist.

I'm sick of the dark ages not being that dark argument (see above post). Yes they were called the dark ages because there are not a lot of records from that era but also because they really fucking were quite a grim time to have lived.

Maybe it's a bad example, but in that reaaally old movie with Sally Field "Not without my daughter", she was willing to DIE in order to get her daughter out of that dire situation.

Me? I'd do the same. I'd rather freakin kill myself than live in that type of world.

And this thing about "beliefs" a lot of people mention to excuse them. I was raised a catholic. I was baptised, given first communion, you name it, the works. But I still had enough of a BRAIN to know what was good/bad for me and how I wanted to live my life.

So what did I do? I CHOSE. I chose which mandates were really important and which made me a better person. I do not steal, cheat, lie, kill, or do anything that would hurt others with my actions. That said, I do whatever the f.ck I want otherwise.

And I was raised in a country full of "machismo" and where men are always supposed to be right and women are still supposed to bow down before them. But I chose.

They choose to embrace their abhorrent behavior where they and their daughters are treated like dirt?

If they think so little of themselves as to feel they should be treated that way, then they deserve it.

The Muslim presence in the Holy Land began with the initial Arab conquest of Palestine in the 7th century. This did not interfere much with pilgrimage to Christian holy sites or the security of monasteries and Christian communities in the Holy Land, and western Europeans were less concerned with the loss of far-away Jerusalem than, in the ensuing decades and centuries, the invasions by Muslims and other hostile non-Christians, such as the Vikings, Slavs and Magyars. However, the Muslim armies' successes put increasing pressure on the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire.

Another factor that contributed to the change in Western attitudes towards the East came in the year 1009, when the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah ordered the Church of the Holy Sepulchre destroyed. In 1039 his successor permitted the Byzantine Empire to rebuild it. [4] Pilgrimages were allowed to the Holy Lands before and after the Sepulchre was rebuilt, but for a time pilgrims were captured and some of the clergy were killed. The Muslim conquerors eventually realized that the wealth of Jerusalem came from the pilgrims; with this realization the persecution of pilgrims stopped.[5] However, the damage was already done, and the violence of the Seljuk Turks became part of the concern that spread the passion for the Crusades."

"Immediate cause

The immediate cause of the First Crusade was Alexius I's appeal to Pope Urban II for mercenaries to help him resist Muslim advances into territory of the Byzantine Empire. In 1071, at the Battle of Manzikert, the Byzantine Empire was defeated, which led to the loss of all of Asia Minor (modern Turkey) save the coastlands. Although attempts at reconciliation after the East-West Schism between the Catholic Western Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church had failed, Alexius I hoped for a positive response from Urban II and got it, although it turned out to be more expansive and less helpful than he had expected.

When the First Crusade was preached in 1095, the Christian princes of northern Iberia had been fighting their way out of the mountains of Galicia and Asturias, the Basque Country and Navarre, with increasing success, for about a hundred years. The fall of Moorish Toledo to the Kingdom of León in 1085 was a major victory, but the turning points of the Reconquista still lay in the future. The disunity of Muslim emirs was an essential factor.

While the Reconquista was the most prominent example of European reactions against Muslim conquests, it is not the only such example. The Norman adventurer Robert Guiscard had conquered the "toe of Italy," Calabria, in 1057 and was holding what had traditionally been Byzantine territory against the Muslims of Sicily. The maritime states of Pisa, Genoa and Catalonia were all actively fighting Islamic strongholds in Majorca and Sardinia, freeing the coasts of Italy and Catalonia from Muslim raids. Much earlier, the Christian homelands of Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, and so on had been conquered by Muslim armies. This long history of losing territories to a religious enemy created a powerful motive to respond to Byzantine Emperor Alexius I's call for holy war to defend Christendom, and to recapture the lost lands starting with Jerusalem."

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Sura (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power."

Abu Dawud (2150) - "The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) 'And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.'"

Sura (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Many Muslim scholars advocated humiliating dhimmis, while others oppose it. In his commentary on Sura 9:29, Ibn Kathir writes that dhimmis must be:

disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of the dhimma or elevate them above Muslims, for they [dhimmis] are miserable, disgraced, and humiliated.[108]

Friedmann sees some Quranic verses as suggesting that Muslims inflict humiliation and misery on unbelievers in support of the goal of making Islam prevail over all other religions.[109] According to 14th-century Egyptian scholar Ibn Naqqash: "[T]he prior degradation of the infidels in this world before the life to come — where it is their lot — is considered an act of piety."[110] In societies where honor plays a critical role, denigration of dhimmis was supposed to reduce them to the lowest level of human life, helping to generate many conversions among dhimmis of upper classes.[111] Bernard Lewis comments:

The Qur’an and tradition often use the word dhull or dhilla (humiliation or abasement) to indicate the status God has assigned to those who reject Mohammad, and in which they should be kept for so long as they persist in that rejection.[112]

As recommended by many Muslim scholars, jizya was to be collected in a humiliating procedure:

[T]he collector remains seated and the infidel remains standing…, his head bowed and his back bent. The infidel must place money on the scales, while the collector holds him by his beard and strikes him on both cheeks.(Al-Nawawi)[113]

Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya… on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… (Al-Ghazali)[114]

Following this [the handing over of the jizya payment] the emir will strike the dhimmi on the neck with his fist; a man will stand near the emir to chase away the dhimmi in haste; then a second and a third will come forward to suffer the same treatment as well as all those to follow. All [Muslims] will be admitted to enjoy this spectacle. (Ahmad al-Dardi al-Adawi)[115]

On the day of payment they [the dhimmis] shall be assembled in a public place … They should be standing there waiting in the lowest and dirtiest place. The acting officials representing the law shall be placed above them and shall adopt a threatening attitude so that it seems to them, as well as to the others, that our object is to degrade them by pretending to take their possessions. They will realize that we are doing them a favor in accepting from them the jizya and letting them go free. They then shall be dragged one by one for the exacting of payment. When paying, the dhimmi will receive a blow and will be thrown aside so that he will think that he has escaped the sword through this. This is the way that the friends of the Lord, of the first and last generations, will act toward their infidel enemies, for might belongs to Allah, to His Prophet, and to the believers. (Muhammad Abd al-Karim al-Maghili)[116]

The dhimmis posture during the collection of the jizya – [lowering themselves] by walking on their hands, reluctantly; on the authority of Ibn ’Abbas (al Tabari).[117]

Some scholars explicitly link this ritual to the interpretation of Sura [Qur'an 9:29], that jizya was not merely to be a tax, but also a symbol of humiliation:[112]

[Saaghiruuna means] submissively… by coercion… [’an yadin means] directly, not trusting the trickery of an intermediary… by force… without resistance… in an unpraiseworthy manner… while you stand [and the dhimmi] sits with the whip in front of you [you take] the money while he has dirt on his head. (Al-Suyuti's tafsir on Sura 9:29)[118]

Abu Yusuf, however, advises against the mistreatment of dhimmis during jizya collection, saying that "they should be treated with leniency".[119] The annual payment ritual was not followed in parts of the Ottoman Empire, where jizya was collected from individuals by representatives of the dhimmi communities themselves.[89] Dhimmis were frequently referred to by derogatory names, both in the official and in the everyday speech. In the Ottoman Empire, the official appellation for dhimmis was "raya", meaning "a herd of cattle". In the Muslim parlance, "apes" was the standard epithet for the Jews, while Christians were frequently denoted as "pigs". These animalistic parallels were rooted in the Qur'anic verses describing some People of the Book being transformed into apes and pigs (Qur'an [Qur'an 5:60]).[120]

Echoing a saying attributed to Muhammad (Sahih Muslim 26:5389), Hasan al-Kafrawi, an 18th century scholar, advises that "if you [Muslims] encounter one of them [dhimmis] on the road, push him into the narrowest and tightest spot".[121] Both Muslim sources and European travelers to the Middle East describe humiliations and insults of dhimmis, and especially of the Jews.[112][122] Throwing of stones at dhimmis was a favorite amusement of Muslim children in many places from early times until nowadays.[102][123]

My only point was to say at different times The Holy Land was being defended by Christians and Muslims, depending on what date one refers to.
Don't confuse it with me defending an Islamic presence there .
It's just that if you want to point fingers at the expansion of Arab/Muslim peoples into Europe and the Middle East, then I think it's only fair to point out the history of Western "Christian" empires expansion into The Middle East, Asia, Central and South America, and Africa as well.

>Actually it isn't. The bible does not promote war and it does not urge to conquer and impose biblical law on conquered slave territories. The koran does.

I don't believe the koran does mention it explicite, the jihad is mentioned and is interpretable as promoting war, but some streams within' the islam don't interpretate this like that, actually...

One thing alot of people forget is that there isn't one "Islam", there are many currents just as in christianity, and they all have a very different interpretation of their holy book, the koran.

For example, You can't even start to count the differences between practicing Islam in Turkey or practicing islam in countries like afghanistan,pakistan, irak, iran and so on.
In Turkey woman aren't aloud to weir headscarfs in public places, and woman aren't kept down and silent.
While as you see in the movie, in other islamic countries its a whole other story...

You can't neglect the influences of the lands culture and history.

To get back to the holy books:
The bible does promote war, as much as the koran does without explicitly mentioning it...
As I recall the bible was used to keep woman down too, don't deny that...
When a woman stood up for herself she was called a witch, a satanlover and then they nicely put a rope around her neck and hung her...

>If you're referring to the crusades, those were defensive wars.

Yeah defending religion
As long as there is religion, there will be people defending it and calling it the "only good way".

But I wasn't referring to that, I was referring to the bible once being an excuse for treating woman badly...

>
>So we should just sit by while they move here and try and institute sharia law because we can't force them into accepting our rules of the game here?

No. But I don't know the right answer to what we should actually do...

~Just Imagine~ said:
>Christophe said:
>
>>Actually it isn't. The bible does not promote war and it does not urge to conquer and impose biblical law on conquered slave territories. The koran does.
>
>I don't believe the koran does mention it explicite,

It does lol, can't be much clearer

>One thing alot of people forget is that there isn't one "Islam", there are many currents just as in christianity, and they all have a very different interpretation of their holy book, the koran.

My point is: when people riot and actually kill people during the riots over some cartoons, I don't hear any muslim outcries. When it's about muslims getting stigmatised as violent barbarians they're all on their hind legs

>For example, You can't even start to count the differences between practicing Islam in Turkey or practicing islam in countries like afghanistan,pakistan, irak, iran and so on.

For now perhaps not, but turkey as well is radicalising. Look at the rise of the islamic party and the prime minister's wife.

>To get back to the holy books:
>The bible does promote war, as much as the koran does without explicitly mentioning it...

Show me

>As I recall the bible was used to keep woman down too, don't deny that...

Show me

>When a woman stood up for herself she was called a witch, a satanlover and then they nicely put a rope around her neck and hung her...

>>So we should just sit by while they move here and try and institute sharia law because we can't force them into accepting our rules of the game here?
>
>No. But I don't know the right answer to what we should actually do...

I do. Vote for me when you see my name on the polls (will let you know full name in due time)

>>
>>I don't believe the koran does mention it explicite,
>
>It does lol, can't be much clearer

Thought it didn't, anyhow, didn't read it so you could be right

>My point is: when people riot and actually kill people during the riots over some cartoons, I don't hear any muslim outcries. When it's about muslims getting stigmatised as violent barbarians they're all on their hind legs

>
>For now perhaps not, but turkey as well is radicalising. Look at the rise of the islamic party and the prime minister's wife.

hm true, there will always be radicals, just like over here (flemmish intrest) or in other countries. The rise of the islamic party is well in the fact that they aren't aloud to practice their believe in public ( i think its a big part of it), wich makes people want to be able to do so, and thus radicalising...
But there is still a big difference, turkey is much more of a western country and I don't believe they will change for the worse, not with them trying to enter into europe...

>
>>To get back to the holy books:
>>The bible does promote war, as much as the koran does without explicitly mentioning it...
>
>Show me
>
>>As I recall the bible was used to keep woman down too, don't deny that...
>
>Show me

I said maybe it's not explicite mention in it, but it has been used as an excuse for it. I haven't read the bible either.
Not so long ago not everyone could read it and they believed what priests, the pope, etc said was right within the christian believe. Like this it has been used for bad and not for good. People didn't know what was wrong or right and they had to believe authority, the bible (believe, religion, etc) has lead to alot of bad things for woman in history.

>>When a woman stood up for herself she was called a witch, a satanlover and then they nicely put a rope around her neck and hung her...
>
>I don't think it was as simple as that, men were burned just as well
>
what addi said
>
>I do. Vote for me when you see my name on the polls (will let you know full name in due time)

~Just Imagine~ said:
>
>Religion leeds to nothing good...
>I can only say, stop believing, stop religion, but who's gonna believe me :)
>
This is just not true.
Religion is a reflection of mankind and is therefore both good and bad.
To say that religion leads to no good is to ignore most of the great works of art, music, and architecture (Michaelangelo and DaVinci come to mind)for the last few thousand years.
Not to mention the great works of charity whenever and wherever there is a need.
Of course there are the bad things like the Inquisition and such, but it is a double sided coin and it is just not true to say it is all bad.
:-)

hmmm
True
But I don't believe the good equals out the balance of the bad.

Believe in the beauty of the earth, the wonders you come across, smell the air, the earth, believe in love between people, believe in friendship, believe in nature, be amazed by what lives on this planet...
Believe in what you can see, there is so much beauty on this earth, and we all neglect it for some kind of god in outer space...

There's enough inspiration to find here, you don't need a god to be creative, to be kind, to love, to create art, music or architecture (art nouveau, gaudi, etc), to believe in ideals ...

Religion made good things happen, but I believe that without religion, good things still would happen... Music, art and architecture will still be created, because it is in human nature to express himself.

Anyhow, I can be naïve, I know I am, I tend to seek the best in people, and my ideals are high, and I get dissapointed in the fact that the world doesn't work like this, and it isn't utopia, but hey, we can all dream a little bit can't we...

As long as there is traveling to be done, cultures to explore, and nature to see, you won't hear me complain that much :)

>Christians started it, not the other way around. Moors reacted and came all the way to Spain in retribution or however you call it.

Just a minor point of clarification to your history, because the above is confusing.
The Arab empire spread out of Africa and muslims were already inhabiting and settled in Spain by the end of the 8th century.
The first crusade didn't happen until the 11th century. Islam's presence in southern Europe had existed for hundreds of years before the battles for Jerusalem even began.

~Just Imagine~ said:
>As long as there is traveling to be done, cultures to explore, and nature to see, you won't hear me complain that much :)

Traveling which destroys said nature with pollution, and cultures to explore where they'll beat you for not wearing headscarves doesn't sound all that appealing to me.

I find it funny (not talking about you specifically anymore) when I hear people talking about how friendly natives are to them. Maybe, just maybe, it also has something to do with the fact that the natives make money (sometimes as their only source) off the tourists.

I'd like to see how well you'd be treated as a young single western female living on the street in egypt and of how much consideration your freedom of religion or expression would be and how much fun you'd find in exploring their culture from the non-tourist side.

~Just Imagine~ said:
>Hm, that other post makes me sound like a hippie

It does, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're not a socialist nutcase. For now, but be careful ;)

>Anyhow, I can be naïve, I know I am, I tend to seek the best in people, and my ideals are high, and I get dissapointed in the fact that the world doesn't work like this, and it isn't utopia, but hey, we can all dream a little bit can't we...

I don't know how much dreaming there's to be done when you see stuff like this video or the picture I posted in the unicef thread.

What's the point in wishful thinking when reality time and time again spits you in the face when you assume people are good with a side of evil instead of evil with a side of good.

>As long as there is traveling to be done, cultures to explore, and nature to see, you won't hear me complain that much :)

~Just Imagine~ said:
>hmmm
>True
>But I don't believe the good equals out the balance of the bad.
>
>Believe in the beauty of the earth, the wonders you come across, smell the air, the earth, believe in love between people, believe in friendship, believe in nature, be amazed by what lives on this planet...
>Believe in what you can see, there is so much beauty on this earth, and we all neglect it for some kind of god in outer space...
>
>There's enough inspiration to find here, you don't need a god to be creative, to be kind, to love, to create art, music or architecture (art nouveau, gaudi, etc), to believe in ideals ...
>
>Religion made good things happen, but I believe that without religion, good things still would happen... Music, art and architecture will still be created, because it is in human nature to express himself.
>
What do you base this opinion on ?
Do you know of any cultures without religion that created anything ?
It might be human nature to express and create, but it is also human nature to worship.
Man has had the need to worship since he came out of the trees and probably always will.
I am personally not religious but I do believe in a creator and as a species you have to admit that humans are a religious bunch.

Also you say above that religion does some good but the bad outweighs the good in your opinion. How do you come to this conclusion ?

~Just Imagine~ said:
>see the movie
>
>does beautifull architecture, and etc outweight this?
>
>In my opinion not!
>
Perhaps not, but what of the many acts of charity and giving that have been done in the name of god ?
Are you not aware of the actions of churches around the world when the tsunami hit Indonesia in 2004 or hurricane Katrina in 2005 ? This list could go on and on.

>>Do you know of any cultures without religion that created anything ?
>
>It's the culture that is forming itself today, at this very moment, more and more people don't follow a religion...
>
Really ? you have evidence of this or just an opinion ? Because I see it otherwise. I see more and more people turning to religion.
I don't necessarily advocate this, I just see it happening. Churches are growing ever bigger and richer everywhere you look. Are the churches in Belguim growing larger or are they empty on Sunday morning ?

So what you are saying is that you do not know of any culture without religion that has created anything ?

>Creation can come out of other things, like I said, nature, love, friendship
>You don't need a god to create, that would be absurd
>
One only needs inspiration to create that is true.
It just happens that god has been man's greatest inspiration since the beginning of time.

>Really ? you have evidence of this or just an opinion ? Because I see it otherwise. I see more and more people turning to religion.
>I don't necessarily advocate this, I just see it happening. Churches are growing ever bigger and richer everywhere you look. Are the churches in Belguim growing larger or are they empty on Sunday morning ?

They are as silent as a graveyard in a mitwintersday. Maybe this is different in other countries, but in belgium religion isn't growing !
NOT BY A LONG SHOT

Actually you saying religion is growing sounds very weird in my ears.
Young people don't believe anymore, it is a common trend.
If you ask in a full class of about 150 people at a school who practices religion, you will get about 5 to 10 people that would rise their hands. About another 10-15 would say they believe in something, but can't define what it actually is. And all the rest couldn't care less about religion or believe. End of story.

>
>So what you are saying is that you do not know of any culture without religion that has created anything ?

I don't know if there are cultures not based on religion at this moment, I will look it up, but I believe not.
but that is perfectly normal.
In history people didn't have the answers to alot of question, and they didn't find the answers in science and etc, so they looked to the only thing that could give an answer, religion. There are still alot of unanswered questions, but we don't look to religion anymore for answers. We use our brains, or brains of others, people of today are more rational, down to earth.
At least a lot of people overhere don't do so anymore.

>
>
>>Creation can come out of other things, like I said, nature, love, friendship
>>You don't need a god to create, that would be absurd
>>
>One only needs inspiration to create that is true.
>It just happens that god has been man's greatest inspiration since the beginning of time.

Yup and thats undeniable, but it isn't anymore! And you'll have to accept that.

Religion is dying in alot of western countries, and I see it as a good thing

You also mentioned the good things religious groups did for things like tsunami's etc. People would still care without religion, Here in belgium we did an huge fundraising, and not one kind of religion had to do with that. The media organised it. (television and radio)
Also the popular radios start projects for different countries need help, water, food, shelter, etc, Everyone supports this. Religion has nothing to do with sharing!
But I believe it is very different in your country where religion still isn't laughed at like overhere maybe.

Anyhow don't think that people wouldn't care about other people without religion, good things will happen, the bad effects stay out.

~Just Imagine~ said:
>ifihadahif said:
>
>
>>Really ? you have evidence of this or just an opinion ? Because I see it otherwise. I see more and more people turning to religion.
>>I don't necessarily advocate this, I just see it happening. Churches are growing ever bigger and richer everywhere you look. Are the churches in Belguim growing larger or are they empty on Sunday morning ?
>
>They are as silent as a graveyard in a mitwintersday. Maybe this is different in other countries, but in belgium religion isn't growing !
>NOT BY A LONG SHOT
>
>Actually you saying religion is growing sounds very weird in my ears.
>Young people don't believe anymore, it is a common trend.
>If you ask in a full class of about 150 people at a school who practices religion, you will get about 5 to 10 people that would rise their hands. About another 10-15 would say they believe in something, but can't define what it actually is. And all the rest couldn't care less about religion or believe. End of story.
>
>
>>
>>So what you are saying is that you do not know of any culture without religion that has created anything ?
>
>I don't know if there are cultures not based on religion at this moment, I will look it up, but I believe not.
> but that is perfectly normal.
>In history people didn't have the answers to alot of question, and they didn't find the answers in science and etc, so they looked to the only thing that could give an answer, religion. There are still alot of unanswered questions, but we don't look to religion anymore for answers. We use our brains, or brains of others, people of today are more rational, down to earth.
>At least a lot of people overhere don't do so anymore.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Creation can come out of other things, like I said, nature, love, friendship
>>>You don't need a god to create, that would be absurd
>>>
>>One only needs inspiration to create that is true.
>>It just happens that god has been man's greatest inspiration since the beginning of time.
>
>Yup and thats undeniable, but it isn't anymore! And you'll have to accept that.
>
>Religion is dying in alot of western countries, and I see it as a good thing
>
>You also mentioned the good things religious groups did for things like tsunami's etc. People would still care without religion, Here in belgium we did an huge fundraising, and not one kind of religion had to do with that. The media organised it. (television and radio)
>Also the popular radios start projects for different countries need help, water, food, shelter, etc, Everyone supports this. Religion has nothing to do with sharing!
>
Religion has nothing to do with sharing ? which religion is that ?
Because I believe most of the major religions have everything to do with sharing.

Also I never said it was only the churches that provided charity, I was merely pointing out that they did provide charity as a rebuttal to your statement that they did not provide any good to the world.
>
>Anyhow don't think that people wouldn't care about other people without religion, good things will happen, the bad effects stay out.
>
"the bad effects say out"
Are you actually saying that crime and violence will be in decline if we do away with all religion ?
Have you no idea what human nature is ?

"When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That's my religion."

To quote some guy with a strange haircut:

"What is the meaning of human life, or of organic life altogether? To answer this question at all implies a religion. Is there any sense then, you ask, in putting it? I answer, the man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life."

To quote some guy with a semi-beard:

"Then he sorrowed, and his sorrow did not deceive him, as life had done, but gave him all it could; for in the sweetness of sorrow he became possessed of his disappointed hopes."

Hif, i merely pointed out that there is a possibility to share without religion. Ofcourse religion takes a big part in this. Religion has its good sides, like I already said, I just don't think it balances out the bad things.

By pointing out that radio/television also play a part in getting people to share, i wanned to focus your attention on the fact that you don't NEED relation to share, not that religion doesn't play a part in sharing.

Don't put words in my mouth, I hate that.

Ofcourse there'd still be violence, and crime, but people couldn't hide after religion anymore. Thats what I hate about it, people saying "It was in the name of god, war for god, etc".

But ofcourse you can't get crime and violence away by removing religion.
Like you said, it's in humans nature.

~Just Imagine~ said:
>christophe I like your quotes, especially the one with the stange hat
>I'd vote for you right now ;)
>

I'm still writing on my "manifesto" if you will (around 50 pages and counting at the moment, it's turning into a book but I want to keep it essay-sized, which is hard when you're covering politics/ethics and some specific problems and want to add some depth to it).

Anyway, it doesn't have those quotes specifically but it has some citations in it taken out of books I've come across, by, among many others of similar stock, the people who uttered those quotes.

Maybe I'll send it to you once it's finished (which would probably be around june or july 2008 if all goes according to plan).

The idea'd be that people who read it would indeed end up voting for me, since I'm serious about going into politics.

>
>I'm still writing on my "manifesto" if you will (around 50 pages and counting at the moment, it's turning into a book but I want to keep it essay-sized, which is hard when you're covering politics/ethics and some specific problems and want to add some depth to it).
>
>Anyway, it doesn't have those quotes specifically but it has some citations in it taken out of books I've come across, by, among many others of similar stock, the people who uttered those quotes.
>
>Maybe I'll send it to you once it's finished (which would probably be around june or july 2008 if all goes according to plan).
>
>The idea'd be that people who read it would indeed end up voting for me, since I'm serious about going into politics.